John H. Mueller

Assessment of perceived general self-efficacy on the internet: Data collection in cyberspace

Abstract General perceived self-efficacy pertains to optimistic beliefs about being able to cope with a large variety of stressors. It is measured with a ten-item scale that has proven useful in cross-cultural research. Previous findings suggest that the construct is universal and that it applies to the majority of cultures worldwide. The present investigation adds a new facet to it: can perceived self-efficacy be measured as part of an interactive computer session while surfing the Internet? A total of 1,437 computer users responded to a survey on the web, half of them young men and women below the age of 26. These data were compared to 290 Canadian university students, 274 teachers in Germany, and 3,077 high school students in Germany. It turned out that all psychometric characteristics were satisfactory. Some evidence for validity emerged. It is suggested that innovative methods of data collection be considered when developing a psychometric scale.

What Are Computing Experiences Good For?: A Case Study in Online Research

The argument has been made that discovery-based experiences in learning to program in LOGO on computers reduce mathematics anxiety. Broadening this perspective, we speculated that the result should be a decrease in test anxiety and an increase in selfconfidence, with enhanced general academic performance, not just mathematics performance. Further, we hypothesized that this benefit would not be limited to the LOGO language, rather it should be a general by-product of self-instruction (discovery) experiences with computers in general. We developed an on-line survey to explore this possibility. This chapter will summarize some of the results of this survey and our experiences with on-line data collection.

Test anxiety and implicit memory

Subjects classified as high or low test-anxious received a standard free recall test as a direct test (explicit memory) following a stem-completion indirect test (implicit memory). As usual, anxious subjects recalled less on the direct test, but were equivalent to low-anxiety subjects on the indirect test. This seemed to be general across anxious-nonanxious words and positive-negative words. The results are consistent with a blockage view of the test anxiety deficit, whereby anxious subjects know things they may not recall on a direct test.

Trait actualization and self-reference effects

Subjects made self-reference judgments about the same trait adjectives from two perspectives, once in terms of the real self and once in terms of the ideal self. Traits could then be partitioned into four categories: those descriptive of both real- and ideal-self concepts, descriptive of real self only (not in the ideal-self concept), descriptive of ideal self only (not in the real-self concept), and those in neither the real- nor the ideal-self concept. Unactualized traits (real only or ideal only) took more time for self-descriptiveness decisions than did actualized (both) traits. Ideal-self decisions were made faster in general than were real-self decisions, for both actualized and unactualized traits. Traits judged to be descriptive of the real self (both or real only) were recalled better than those not descriptive of real self (ideal only and neither); in particular, subjects were best at remembering undesirable features of the real self and desirable features of the ideal self.

Test anxiety and handedness

Differences in test anxiety were examined in left- and right-handed subjects. Four different samples revealed no consistent handedness differences for either the worry or the emotionality component of test anxiety, and this was true for men and for women. There was little indication that high test anxiety was more detrimental for left-handers than for right-handers.

Stereotyping and Face Memory

We often hear it said that “I never forget a face,” but those involved in face memory research know that there is variation in subjects’ performance. Is there a way to identify people who are good face recognizers? This question has pragmatic significance to people sifting through eyewitness reports, for example, but it would be of theoretical value as well insofar as it helped identify the mechanisms involved in face processing.

Best practices: What perspective, what evidence?

Abstract We have endured thirty years of progressively more convoluted research ethics reviews, in the absence of any ongoing assessment that any new regulation has been effective. To assess effectiveness, of course, we would need a baseline, but there never was a demonstrated need for the regulations in the first place. Further, to assess effectiveness, we would need a clear definition of the goal state, but the reasonable objective of public safety has been repeatedly transformed into socially desirable outcomes. Research as a way to decode nature has become redirected to building a better world, an outcome that is too nebulous to assess. We are increasingly directed to “best practices” workshops as a solution, but there is no way to identify best practices if we are not assessing effectiveness. As a result research ethics reviews are not based on data, but on faith and dogma, and they increasingly appear to be more about censorship than public safety.

Chapter 8 – What Are Computing Experiences Good For?: A Case Study in Online Research

The argument has been made that discovery-based experiences in learning to program in LOGO on computers reduce mathematics anxiety. Broadening this perspective, we speculated that the result should be a decrease in test anxiety and an increase in selfconfidence, with enhanced general academic performance, not just mathematics performance. Further, we hypothesized that this benefit would not be limited to the LOGO language, rather it should be a general by-product of self-instruction (discovery) experiences with computers in general. We developed an on-line survey to explore this possibility. This chapter will summarize some of the results of this survey and our experiences with on-line data collection.

What Are Computing Experiences Good For

The argument has been made that discovery-based experiences in learning to program in LOGO on computers reduce mathematics anxiety. Broadening this perspective, we speculated that the result should be a decrease in test anxiety and an increase in selfconfidence, with enhanced general academic performance, not just mathematics performance. Further, we hypothesized that this benefit would not be limited to the LOGO language, rather it should be a general by-product of self-instruction (discovery) experiences with computers in general. We developed an on-line survey to explore this possibility. This chapter will summarize some of the results of this survey and our experiences with on-line data collection.